The idea behind the Mach effect device is to exploit the difference between mass and inertia and was originally proposed by Mach a century ago. A lot of the effort on perpetual motion devices and their like has been down this line. What queers such experiments has been rising complexity making experimental differentiation impossible. It all disappears into the noise.
My objection has been that these experiments lack a theoretical model for inertia itself. That is a rather fundamental question.
My conjecture is that inertia is a natural artifact of the empirical reality that the inverse of mathematical infinity is not zero but is a very small value as infinity itself is a very large value approximately equal to 1078. This means that motion consists of very small discrete steps.
Turning that into a source of energy appears unlikely but surprise can not be ruled out. Except that this also applies to our understanding of so called continuous electrical process were the potential for kidding ourselves is much better.
I am not an optimist.
MAY 12, 2010
If the Mach Effect is real [mass fluctations) and behaves as theorized (with some experimental confirmation) by James Woodward and the effect scales up as expected then we can create propellentless space drive. It appears that the latest research work by James Woodward is validating the existence of the effect.
Jim Woodward is building a new more robust shuttler test article.and Paul March is building a new Mach-Lorentz Thruster (MLT) prototype based on some N4700 COTS caps that should produce at least an order of magnitude higher thrust than my last successful test article, the Mach-2MHz, which generated up to 0.5 gram-force, (~5.0 milli-Newton). As to when these new test articles will see first light, my guess is sometime this summer.
Paul March's Mach-2MHz test article in a MINWAX Faraday shield used the same 500pF at 15kV, Y5U barium titanate caps that Jim was using at the time, but alas no vaccum system, it generated a first light thrust of ~5,000 micro-Newton running at 3.8 MHz. (See Paul March's STAIF-2006 paper and the related slides.)
Theoretical Scaling Rules for the Mach Effect
The Mach Effect for propulsion is proportional to the applied vxB Magnetic-field
The CUBE of the applied Cap Voltage
The CUBE of the MLT Operating Frequency
The SQUARE of the Cap dielectric constant
The thickness of the Cap Dielectric
Proportional to the total active Dielectric Mass
But Inversely Proportional to the Cap Density
2500 pF versus 500 pF (capacitance 5 times, so the N4700 should be 25 times better) Cube of the voltage 20- kV instead of 15 kV (1.33 cubed or 64/27 which is over double the Mach 2 Mhz experiment )
